Compare Mike Castle to Authentic Republican Moderates
CNN is now reporting that Olympia Snowe will co-sponsor the Democrat’s plan to bring the troops home:
…Now this is significant because it makes it now just Olympia Snowe, but Sen. Gordon Smith of Oregon, two Republicans who are now going to vote with the Democrats on this. It is significant in terms of the symbolism of it, in terms of the fact it is indicative of what we have been seeing, the growing opposition to the President and to his war strategy. Prior there have been many, many votes on Iraq, many votes on the Democrats’ plans to bring troops home, but Republicans simply haven’t voted that way. … Olympia Snowe is saying she will.
Meanwhile phoney moderate Mike Castle continues to support George Bush.
“Meanwhile phoney moderate Mike Castle continues to support George Bush.”
You’re running away from Castle’s voting record.
http://www.cqpolitics.com/2007/07/party_unity_less_of_a_sure_thi.html
Oh lord…how many times to I have to debunk this utter BS?
7. Michael N. Castle, Delaware’s At-Large (68.3 percent). Castle is a quintessential Republican moderate who has long dominated elections in a state that has swung Democratic in its presidential voting (including in 2004, when Kerry won 53 percent). Castle was easily elected to an eighth term in 2006, though his 57 percent vote share was a career low.
Okay – once more for the newbie.
Castle get that score by voting against his leader when it does not matter. Look at his record when the vote is close – he is a down the line party hack.
Also, you might be tempted to point out that Castle voted for the “non binding” troop redeployment resolution. I’d caution you away from that for the simple reason that he followed up that vote with a vote AGAINST the BINDING troop redeployment resolution.
Keep running…
Please.
Don’t make me scoff at you.
I apologize for bringing facts into this forum. Next time I’ll stick to conjecture and circular logic. With any luck, I won’t be scoffed at.
Don’t bet on it. Especially when your “facts” consist of your ill-informed opinion sprinkled with flimsy and unsubstantiated Castle talking points.
So now you’ve put this on the table:
A study performed by Congressional Quarterly = unsubstantiated Castle talking points
Again, I’m not sure if I can bury my head deep enough in the sand to pull something like that out of my ass, but the next time I post on this forum, I’ll be sure to try my best.
Someone here is running away from Castle’s record and it is you running away from his VOTES THAT COUNTED. The rest is PR and PR that you seem to find somehow conclusive.
Whatever.
Run away, run way. Be happy. Wrap yourself in ignorance and sleep well.
Jason, you just don’t GET it at all. The only VOTES THAT COUNTED are the 32% of the VOTES where Castle has crossed party lines. Everything else was just SMOKE AND MIRRORS for Castle to maintain the illusion of BEING IN a political party. THAT makes Castle a %100 maverick rebel badass.
There, that logic seems to be a bit more up your alley since it is something that I just made up and can support with nothing.
So Wenky, we seem to be at an impass. I suggest a little bet that might allow the South-going Zax and North-going Zax to step aorund each other.
Here is the deal.
If Castle votes for the next Democratic plan to redeploy the troops and thereby stops supporting George Bush and his open ended war – I will conceede that Castle is (at long last) a moderate.
Likewise, if he plays George’s bitch again and votes to stay the course in Iraq, you conceed that he is (still) a conservative.
Deal?
“Likewise, if he plays George’s bitch again and votes to stay the course in Iraq, you conceed that he is (still) a conservative.”
Or correct….depends on how you look at it.